Attainment of Krishnamurti and Erroneous Conclusions.

There are superficial understanding of Krishnamurti, by whom, who don't have a Fragmented mind like K. They may be young people as well as old. There may be many reasons why they understand K superficially. One reason may be due to that they were mystified by the utterances of K, which is incomprehensible, and that incomprehensibility itself has led to the belief, that there is a depth in the statements made by K. So these people go on studying K, and never would get anything from it. Then the second type of people who are led by the superficial explanations presented by K himself, for the real factual fragmentation he experienced within, to explain it, which is in his mind. Hence, not understanding this factual fragmentation of the mind within, that of K, these people only understand the superficial explanation of the fragmentation, without.

Then there are a few 'young' people whose mind is fragmented 'in thinking', hence they do understand Krishnamurti factually, but not completely. Their understanding stems primarily from the fact, from the out come of the fragmented thinking. That is, 'thinking' breeds fear, insecurity, doubt leading to sufferings. They understand partially because, that no two persons having fragmented minds cannot be equal in their fragmentations. Hence, these people who have divided minds, continue to read K to understand the rest of it, which does not accords with their experiences of fragmentation, even if they read K, whole of their life. Hence the understanding is being factual as well as partial, not complete. These are 'a few young people', a 1% of the population, having fragmented minds, and if they ever had the chance of reading K, would become an immediate follower of K.

But many who understand Krishnamurti factually and partially are older people, who had a non-fragmented minds in their younger age, but have developed a fragmented mind, when they become old and sick. So they understand Krishnamurti, factually as well as partially, due to the same reason that no two fragmentation can be equal. But they have an awareness, that they did not experience fragmentation in their younger, healthy life. So in denial of that younger age experience, and to the contrary, these older people become more assertive saying Krishnamurti is right, and ready to justify everything Krishnamurti says, in order to prove it to themselves.

The solution to this suffering, born out of the doubt, fear and insecurity, from the 'divided thinking', is to stop the thinking. This indicates that the 'thinking' as the cause of Fragmentation, and the Fragmentation as the cause of doubt, fear and insecurity. Though the 'stopping of the thinking', relieve the doubt, fear and insecurity, does not do away with the fragmentation, but only hides the same, since the real cause of fragmentation is not 'thinking'. This 'thought-less-ness' is only a temporary solution, just like a temporary amnesia, where one becomes even aware of such an amnesia. For instance, when we have a great unbearable pain due to some injury, there would be a short spell of relief on and off, which can be called as temporary amnesia. But none of the Krishnamurti followers have claimed to have experienced, this 'thoughtless' state of relief from the fragmented mind, ever. It may be due to that, none of them experienced doubt, fear, insecurity and suffering to the extent, Krishnamurti experienced the same, requiring the mind to go to an amnesia stage of thoughtlessness. When we read Krishnamurti's Diary, we can understand the amount of suffering he continuously underwent.

Hence, there was not, and there is not, anyone who have understood Krishnamurti at Attainment level, having attained to 'thoughtless' state.

Why the 'thoughtless' state is a temporary solution for Krishnamurti?

Any solution is a temporary one, if it does not solve the root reason. Krishnamurti understood the problem, but took the immediate cause as the root reason of the problem. The immediate reasons are the fragmented nature of the mind. But this fragmented nature being the immediate reason, but Krishnamurti erroneously concluded that fragmentation arises due to 'thinking'. In actuality, due to Fragmentation in the mind, one feels that the 'thinking' is fragmented or causing fragmentation. In an healthy mind, since there is no fragmentation, one does not feel that 'thinking' as causing fragmentation. Though there is fragmentation in Krishnamurti's mind before thinking, but only when K 'thinks', that the fragmentation becomes apparent, that the fragmentation become manifest. This Krishnamurti could not detect. One of the main reason for this is that the Fragmentation has happened to K, in very early life, which he could not remember as how did he was thinking at that stage, without having a fragmentation, to be compared with. But people who have developed this at later stage, and if they remember their non-fragmented thinking, with that of fragmented thinking, then they would be able to identify the reasons for fragmentation being as memory gaps or cognition gaps. But still some may have the rare experiences of 'memory gaps' leading to fragmentation, even with a healthy mind and this I have already explained. So it is evident, that the Fragmentation is caused by some missing function or the attributes of the healthy mind such as memory or cognition gaps, etc. Since, Krishnamurti was not aware of these missing items of mind attributes, which are the reasons for fragmentation, he erroneously concludes that 'thinking' as the cause or reason for fragmentation, but the 'thinking' is the function which brings out the fragmentation to surface, make it apparent, make the fragmentation to manifest.

If one has a great pain in one of his leg, doctors may inject a pain killer, removing the pain for a while. But in that one may even not feel the leg as well. then this is not a permanent solution, healthy solution, as one has to feel the leg, but not the pain. Once the leg is cured, he would feel the leg but not he pain. In the same way one must be able to 'think' without being fragmented in mind, if it is a real solution.

Since Krishnamurti concluded that 'thinking' as the reason for fragmentation or division, he further concludes, one attributes of the thinking, that is the memory, as a 'condition' for thinking and fragmentation. Then he further erroneously concludes, if the memory can be erased, then there won't be a 'condition' or a 'reason', making the 'thinking' possible. Hence, memory having all the knowledge, etc., are also a problem for Krishnamurti, but not for a normal healthy person.

Then what is the solution? How one can rectify this root problem of missing mind attributes of memory or cognition, to restore the Mind to a healthy state, to a complete state? When one is born blind, deaf or dumb, are there any solutions to restore the same? If there is no way to restore a physical disability as such, how can a defective mind can be restored, as science is not aware of the mind, does not recognize the mind, a non-physical organ?

<Previous Post            First Post              NEXT ->

Krishnamurti On Brain & Mind. Nonsense Part Two.

The Krishnamurti's confidence build up due to the fact, that there are people, who are mystified by his teaching of fragmented mind, as they could not understand the same, and that difficulty in the understanding K, itself has made them the followers of K. Thinking that there is a deep meaning in his teaching, which was never to be found in other teachings, because no other teacher has taught about a fragmented , divided mind being the reason as to the sufferings one undergoes.

With this confidence Krishnamurti started to talk about many different things, which don't have any relationships to Mind and the sufferings, but relating them superficially to it, taking the audience as comprising of fools.

Let us look at some of such situations and things, K indulged at.

Quote Krishnamurti:

DB: Now that ties up with the other question of the mind and the brain. The brain is an activity in time, as a physical, chemical, complex process.

JK: I think the mind is separate from the brain.

DB: What does separate mean? Are they in contact?

JK: Separate in the sense that the brain is conditioned and the mind is not.

DB: Let's say the mind has a certain independence of the brain. Even if the brain is conditioned...

JK: ...the other is not.

DB: It need not be...

JK: ...conditioned.

DB: On what basis do you say that?

JK: Let's not begin on what basis I say that.

DB: Well, what makes you say it?

JK: As long as the brain is conditioned, it is not free.

DB: Yes.

JK: And the mind is free.

DB: Yes, that is what you are saying. But you see, the brain not being free means that it is not free to enquire in an unbiased way.

....

JK: So as long as the brain is conditioned its relationship to the mind is limited.

DB: We have the relationship of the brain to the mind, and also the other way round.

JK: Yes. But the mind being free has a relationship to the brain.

DB: Yes. Now we say the mind is free, in some sense, not subject to the conditioning of the brain.

JK: Yes.

......

JK: Not time. Time belongs to the brain.

....

JK: Yes, the interval between two noises. Two thoughts. Two notes.

......

JK: No. So can the brain, with all its cells conditioned, can those cells radically change?

........

DB: Just touched occasionally. But those cells that are conditioned, whatever they may be, evidently dominate consciousness now.

JK: Yes. Can those cells be changed?

DB: Yes.

JK: We are saying that they can, through insight; insight being out of time, not the result of remembrance, not an intuition, nor desire, nor hope. It is nothing to do with any time and thought.

DB: Yes. Now is insight of the mind? Is it of the nature of mind? An activity of mind?                JK: Yes.

DB: Therefore you are saying that mind can act in the matter of the brain.

JK: Yes, we said that earlier.

.....

DB: The brain is rather like a radio receiver which can generate its own noise, but would not pick up a signal.

JK: Not quite. Let's go into this a little. Experience is always limited. I may blow up that experience into something fantastic, and then set up a shop to sell my experience, but that experience is limited. And so knowledge is always limited. And this knowledge is operating in the brain. This knowledge is the brain. And thought is also part of the brain, and thought is limited. So the brain is operating in a very, very small area.

_____________________________________

Second talk between Bohm and K in the book "The Future Of Humanity".

End of the Quote.

If one reads this discussion between Krishnamurti and Bohm, with paying attention to the highlighted sections in bold letters, it is clear that conditioning is in the brain, is in the cells of the brain, according to Krishnamurti. That is conditioning as defined by Krishnamurti as past knowledge, memory consisting of past experiences, etc., etc., is in the brain. Not only that, the 'Thinking' is also, comes from brain.

Here, you may notice that Krishnamurti at one point talks about the "Interval between two thoughts", in reference to the fragmentation in thinking. Then that 'Interval' or the Gap also should be a part of the brain as thoughts are also in the brain, according to Krishnamurti.

Also Krishnamurti says that, the Time belongs to the brain. Why he would have concluded that? When we sleep, that is when our body sleeps, meaning the brain as the body also sleeping, we don't feel anything, including the time. So it is evident that Krishnamurti felt this, not because him thinking about the nature of sleep, but because of the nature of his wakeful state, where mind goes 'blank', when the thinking stops, as there is no cognition taking place in his mind, thus creating a void, a 'blank. For a normal person, specially a child, who does not think, but only recognizes the world, or a person who is in a state of Samadi, where there is no thinking, but still there would be cognitions, when there is no thinking, and would not fall into a 'Void' or to a 'Blank'.

So Krishnamurti clearly separates the mind and brain, thus including things of the mind to that of the brain, such as memory, knowledge, thinking etc.

So, let us hope for the day, when scientists find a way to infuse knowledge in the the brain making every one an Educated person. And the day scientist erase unnecessary knowledge plus memory items, which brings us suffering, thus where one don't have to go after the spiritual practices, to be free from sufferings.

So then the question arises,

How did Krishnamurti know of the existence of the brain, if he did not believe others, like scientists, who have opened the skull of the heads of dead people to know that there is brain inside, thus concluding, therefore there should be a brain in everyones head, as a conclusion. This type of believing in others knowledge, is not self inquiry of one's own mind. No one has gone to such a hilarious self inquiry.

Then Krishnamurti concludes, asserts more things about the brain, even scientists would be shy to do so. How he came to this knowledge in not comprehensible.

But I can understand the situation. When one is kept in a higher pedestal, implying that 'we are ready to believe in you', then understanding the fools around him, he will be fearless to utter nonsense, as no one would challenge him, but only will accept everything.

When this happens for a quite a time, that the person who were taken as the Teacher, would himself, can think thus, "I have said things, which no one challenged, but only accepted. Then these things which came to my mind should be true. Hence, my thinking is true. Therefore, whatever comes to my mind, I can present as Truth. And I am the Truth. I am the embodiment of the Truth." This is the highest 'nonsense', highest madness.

This is the perception Krishnamurti would have developed at later stages of his life, thankful to fools who were around him.

<Previous Post            First Post               NEXT ->

Krishnamurti Nonsense - Part One - Mind and Brain.

Once, some people have accepted that Krishnamurti is a World Teacher, without denying the fact, Krishnamurti used to imply the same by different means, which I would deal in many of the future post as well. Apart from directly implying that he is a Word teacher, he used to imply the same by other means as well, indirectly.

One of the other means he used, is to discuss topics, which are out of his perspective of expertise, but born out of the confidence, that none of his followers had a simple knowledge of what he speaks about, which was well prepared before hand, and even if an expert to be there in the audience, he would not raise questions, once he understands, that Krishnamurti was talking on the particular subject, without having any proper knowledge of it, hence he will understand, it is foolish, to raise questions.

These 'Nonsense' topics, Krishnamurti discussed had no relationship to his 'Core' teaching, but he tried to relate them to it, creating funny and inconsistencies there.

Let us examine one of the such topic Krishnamurti discussed, which is about Mind and Brain.

Quote K:

So, what is the mind? Obviously, the mind is our total awareness or consciousness; it is the total way of our existence, the whole process of our thinking. The mind is the result of the brain. The brain produces the mind. Without the brain there is no mind, but the mind is separate from the brain. It is the child of the brain. If the brain is limited, damaged, the mind is also damaged. The brain, which records every sensation, every feeling of pleasure or pain, the brain with all its tissues, with all its responses, creates what we call the mind, although the mind is independent of the brain. (J. Krishnamurti, The Book of Life).

Third Talk in New Delhi, 1959

Talks by Krishnamurti in India 1959 New Delhi, Madras.

End of the Quote.

Krishnamurti says, "The mind is the result of the brain." How does he say this? Did he know that he had a brain inside his skull? Even if he believed the scientists who say there is a brain inside the skull, did he know that mind is the result of the brain? So it is evident that Krishnamurti believed the scientists who say that there is a Brain inside the skull and, he further believed the neuro-scientists who say that 'thinking' , 'memory', etc., which are mind attributes or mind functions, are related to brain, but none have said that one is the result of the other.

What if these scientist change their theorems, as usually they do, when they find new evidences, as they have already done, one may be aware, where now they say, even the stomach is also a cause or a reason, producing thinking.

Hence, it is evident, by believing the scientific informations available by that time, Krishnamurti had concluded, that 'the Mind is the result of the brain'.

I am surprised at the Krishnamurti followers, who say that they are not conditioned, by believing on anything, whereas their teacher, Krishnamurti, was believing in science and giving that inaccurate knowledge of the same, as his spiritual understanding.

Mind is what we experience as thinking, emotions, feelings, awareness, etc., etc. When there is a cold wind, we experience the same on our body, on our skins, as a sensation of the cold. Are we going to conclude this body and skin is as a part of Mind? No. Body is body, but not mind. but there is a relationship, and none is an outcome or result of the other.

Was not Krishnamurti, conditioned by this scientific information? Can any one experience one's brain as one experiences his mind? Then, how did Krishnamurti experienced his brain, to conclude that the, mind as the outcome of the brain? Mind as the result of the brain?

There are animals which don't have brain. How do they function? how do they identify their prey or food? How do a single celled Amoeba, function?

Quote K:

And walking on that road, there was complete emptiness of the brain , and the mind was free of all experience, the knowing of yesterday, though a thousand yesterdays have been. Time, the thing of thought, had stopped; literally there was no movement before and after; there was no going or arriving or standing still. Space as distance was not; there were the hills and bushes but not as high and low. There was no relationship with anything but there was an awareness of the bridge and the passer-by. The totality of the mind, in which is the brain with its thoughts and feelings, was empty; and because it was empty, there was energy, a deepening and widening energy without measure. All comparison, measurement belong to thought and so to time. The otherness was the mind without time; it was the breath of innocence and immensity. Words are not reality; they are only means of communication but they are not the innocence and the immeasurable. The emptiness was alone.

Krishnamurti's Notebook | 20th October to 20th November 1961.

End of the Quote.

Here again Krishnamurti says there is a definite relationship or out come or result of the Brain, which is the mind. Hence, the "brain has to empty itself to mind to be empty".

No spiritual teacher in the past have said that the Mind as an out come of the brain, on one in the present, and no one will be in the future. If that is the case, there is a possibility that the scientists finding a way to stimulate the brain to remove the sufferings, as where they would remove the reasons for the sufferings, such as Anger, Desire, Lust, Ego and ignorance.

But in the case of Krishnamurti and similar people, who suffer, not due to the above reasons, but because of the Divided, fragmented minds, which creates, doubt, fear and insecurity, when they think, thus rectifying their brains, for the missing mind attributes, which is the cause of the Fragmentation, bringing the mind to a whole, complete state. Then they will be able to think without any fear, doubts, insecurity.

Therefore, they don't have to rely on a Pathless solution.

Looking at those two quote of the Krishnamurti, it is evident that when one tries to understand them, thinking that there is a meaning in them, definitely he will be led to some wilderness, imaginations, which some of them find difficult to undo, and come out clean, to think afresh in a factual way, in a healthy way, seeing through the loops of Krishnamurti.

<Previous Post            First Post               NEXT ->

How Do The 'Non-Divided', View The 'Fragmented' Mind?

The people of 'Non-Divided' mind, the people who have 'Whole', Un-fragmented minds, can they have a view of these people whose mind are divided? 

Yes,it is possible, first by the symptoms they exhibit, by the way of speech and deeds. Second by in comparison, of their mind, to one's mind which is Whole, which is not Fragmented, to identify the missing mind attributes of a fragmented mind.
For these to be done one must first identify the function of his mind in full, with all the relevant mind attributes understood, as how they function, in a complete cycle, without leaving any Gaps, hence not leading to any Fragmentation or division in the function, and the thinking. 

Then, there should be an accurate description of the Fragmented mind, how it works, how division brings about some symptoms, without, because of the fragmentation. But, here one cannot expect a description of the missing mind attributes of such a person, in his description, as there is no way he can become aware of such missing items from his mind. 

Though there are many thousands of people, who have such a fragmented mind, which we can identify from their behavior, who constitute about 1-2% of the population, none seem to have identified their inner nature of the mind function of the Fragmented thinking, for us to compare can contrast.
But lucky and exactly that is what Krishnamurti has done. Hence we can identify these attributes, which are missing and making a mind fragmented. Is there are any use, in this exercise? 

Yes, there is a definite use in this endeavor. First we must recognize, there is an already a beneficial effect of Krishnamurti's teaching on such people who have Fragmented in their mind. When they read things, hear things, listen to many Guru's, many Teacher, in order to find a solution for their problems of sufferings, which is the result of doubt, insecurity, fear, etc., created by this fragmented thinking, they would not find any solution as well as any kind relief at least, as by encountering a description of the Fragmented mind. But when they listen, read, and watch Krishnamurti, for the first time in their life, they would understand their problems are well explained, which would be a great relief in the first instance. Then, when Krishnamurti tells just to watch these mental agonies, divisions, fragmentation, responses, etc., without trying to do anything, without trying to do way with them, without pushing them away, etc., but to accept them as they are, while those problems lasts, and to accept the situations as it is, when the problems are absent, for these people who have the fragmented minds, it is a great solution, even if it is not a permanent one, this "Choice less Awareness". They would have found how to deal with a situation, rather than bewildered by the situation. 

Thirdly, Krishnamurti had given hope of a final solution to the problems coming out of a Fragmented mind, which he termed as 'Thoughtless' state, which he also called as a Pathless journey into it, whether Krishnamurti is correct or wrong in his description immaterial, but it certainly gives such people hope, a motive, which could be an unconscious one, as these people cannot consciously entertain a 'motive' or a goal or an aim, due the fragmented nature of the their thinking, which is explained well by Krishnamurti, as it would further the perpetuation of the division creating more sufferings. Those are correct exposition of a Fragmented mind by Krishnamurti, which would definitely a benefit to those who have same type of mind. 

Fourthly, When Krishnamurti indicates and generalizes this Fragmentation within, this Division within, to outside problems in politics, in war, in education, etc., and specially and specifically generalizes, that all the people are suffering from the same fragmentation in their thinking, it would certainly give a tremendous boost to these people who actually have such a mind, in thinking, "Oh, it is not only me, who have this problem of doubt, insecurity, fear, etc., and I am not only the one, who feel the Division in thinking, all else have the same problem, so why should I worry? But I should be much thankful to Krishnamurti for enlightening me, and giving me hope, curing me to a greater extent, as a teacher of the World, and he is definitely a Teacher of the World, and by the word." 

Though this generalization is erroneous for the 98%, and only true for 2%, it does not matter, even though this was not a solution for 98%, but it is at least a solution for the 2%, of the population. 

When one understands Krishnamurti's explanations of a Fragmented mind, in comparison to one's own Whole mind, one can be a help to such a one, who has the fragmented mind, in understanding him, in giving love, care and security needed by him from others, or from some unhealthy situations, and not laughing at him, when he makes irrelevant comments, inconsistent speech and deeds, etc., by understanding, by not reacting.

<Previous Post            First Post              NEXT ->

 

What Exactly The Problem Krishnamurti Had?

K's problem was insecurity, doubt, fear leading to sufferings. For that the solution is to find security, an environment which does not create fear, an environment which, does not make doubts in oneself within and without , but a surrounding having love and care. Krishnamurti was lucky to have all these in full. Then he had this insecurity, doubt, fear within, making him to suffer. But that great suffering he underwent, which is termed as The Process, which involved mental agony and physical pain, led to a situation of relief, for which, Krishnamurti could not understand how the relief came about, Hence he called as a Pathless. 
 
But we must understand, when one experiences great mental agony and great physical pains for many years, as in the case of Krishnamurti, more than ten years, naturally mind would find a solution, if one looks for a way out as in the case of K. This situation is similar to amnesia, and can a person who is in amnesia, recognize that it had happened to him?
 

Why was Krishnamurti, was looking for a solution to his problems of insecurity, doubt, fear ? there are many others in the population, once when they develop such a situation just like Krishnamurti, where his thinking becomes Fragmented, and when he finds that he cannot communicate with others due to this fact, where one would be laughed at, and ridiculed, if he tries to express himself, creating insecurity, doubt and fear. Then only thing, such a person would do is to withdraw himself from the society, without trying to find a solution. 
 
Since, Krishnamurti was selected to find a solution for human sufferings, which normally arise from the Greed, Anger, Lust, Ignorance, etc. for humans having a normal Whole mind, where their thinking is not fragmented. Hence, these suffering are different form that of Krishnamurti. Normal people don't have fear, doubt and insecurity when they think. Hence, they don't seek solutions for them. They would leave everything, including all the physical securities they have, in search of the spiritual attainments leading to free themselves from sufferings, and even go to live secluded in remote places, without any fear. 
 
But on the other hand, Krishnamurti never renounced the comfort, security, money, etc., because they were needed for him, and was very much concerned in furthering his Ego. But he emphasized to the contrary telling that he is Ego-less. This extension of His Ego as a World Teacher, he cunningly covered, exhibited in his legal action to possess the legal rights for books and other publications. 
 
But then Krishnamurti was guided in meditation, where those people who guided would have given the** idea of suffering**, and to find a solution for them. But Krishnamurti had accepted the idea of suffering, as he was a person who is really suffering within mentally, and without physically, as no other person would have undergone. This meditation instruction has lead to Krishnamurti to look inside, to his mind. What he has found is a fragmented mind, which he clearly observed. He clearly identified the outcomes of his fragmented mind as well. The outcomes being the doubt, fear and insecurity leading to sufferings. 
 
Then Krishnamurti, after suffering for so long, and could not do any of the meditation, which was taught to him, due to the fact that the mind is Fragmented, and any attempt to do so, do anything, or even just to 'think' about the meditation, would further the fragmentation, but he was wishing to end the thinking, which was causing the fragmentation and suffering, and the mind accepts his suggestions and one final day, that is, 10 days after his brother Nithya's death, he finds the solution of 'Thoughtless' , which would have been the 'Amnesia', provided by the mind for the great pain he underwent throughout, plus the sufferings after the ten days from the death of Nithya. 
 
Hence, Krishnamurti's solution is only for him, not for the masses who don't have the same suffering as of Krishnamurti. But there may be a few individuals, who have a fragmented mind or who may have developed the same later in their life. If they read and listen K, and start to look within, to find out how doubt, fear , insecurity comes about in themselves, that itself would be a much relief. 
 
But if they suggest to themselves actively, to have a Thoughtless state, that it can come about, and that is the Path to the solution, for the problem of suffering, though Krishnamurti was suggesting the same for himself, unconsciously all those years of sufferings, which he did not know, hence he considered it to be pathless. 
 

But all other people who suffer, not due to a fragmented mind, but due to Hate, greed, Ego, lust and Ignorance, there is only one path, as put forwarded by Lord Buddha, and explained by His Four Noble Truths.

<Previous Post            First Post               NEXT ->

Followers Of Krishnamurti, Don't Follow K.

All most 100 percent of Krishnamurti followers would say, that they are not following K. But this is not due to the fact, that they understand Krishnamurti, when he said, "Don't follow me!", but because, that they have taken the advice given by K, as to not to follow him. But when confronted with any arguments about spirituality or religion, they would only quote Krishnamurti. Then it is evident that they are following Krishnamurti, for sure. But this following of Krishnamurti, as such, is in a way, does not amount to following of Krishnamurti, in comparison to, one who follows a certain religion out of believing in it, or following a Path of spirituality to free oneself from suffering, as in Buddhism. 

Then, what is that following of Krishnamurti by some people, which does not amount to following K? 

It is where one get inspired by Krishnamurti's Teaching, by listening and reading, but not understanding any of the Teaching, but then thinking and imagining, that one understands it. But here he remembers most of the advises given by K, and would quote the same in a discussion, when confronted with a different opinion. 

For instance, Krishnamurti insists that Meditation practices cannot take one to free oneself from the problems one faces. Here I use the word, 'Problems' as it is evident from K explaining as such, of his problems, coming out of his Divided mind, which are not the problems of Sufferings, as which are explained in Buddhism, for instance. So for his Problems, coming out of his Divided, Fragmented mind, Krishnamurti was lucky to encounter a simple solution of 'Thoughtless' state, which dissolves the problems, not permanently, but intermittently. Though Krishnamurti is aware that his mind is divided, and Fragmented, leading to a type of suffering, which are caused by the Division, that is, insecurity, doubt, fear, etc., but he is not aware that 99% of the population don't have this division, within, hence they don't feel doubt, insecure and fear, when they 'think', even of a neutral object like 'door'. Also Krishnamurti was not aware, what has caused the mind to be fragmented, but only knew, that the mind is fragmented.

Then he clearly assumes for others, that their minds are fragmented, and because of that the others also have the problems of doubt, insecurity, fear, etc., casing suffering in them. Then this generalization, leads to Krishnamurti to suggest that solution is pathless one, as to others as well, as he concluded the same for himself. But the ignorance of the Gap, which applies only to Krishnamurti, and the ignorance of what constitutes the missing attributes of the mind, which creates the Gaps, has lead to this erroneous conclusions from K. So Krishnamurti followers would insist that meditation practices cannot achieve any results, just remembering Krishnamurti, on his insistence of the solution being pathless, without understanding, what he meant by it. 

But the unfortunate thing here is, this believing in K, that the solutions is Pathless, have conditioned these followers not to try practicing of meditation, where their problems are not of the Division of the Mind, causing, doubt, insecurity, fear, etc., coming out of 'thinking', but they have sufferings coming out of Anger, Desire, Ego, Ignorance, etc., and they have Whole minds, but not fragmented minds. So for them the practice of meditation would be a solution, which they would never find out, unfortunately.
So this is the first type of following of Krishnamurti, where they follow him without understanding him, hence it is not 'following Krishnamurti.' 

Then there are the ones who follow Krishnamurti, with an understanding of what K speaks about, who are only 1% of the population. Why do they are able to understand K?
They are able to understand Krishnamurti, because they have Divided, Fragmented mind as of K. But one cannot tell these fragmentation of their minds are exactly similar to that of Krishnamurti. When things are whole, it will be similar in nature with all the individual items of the Whole. The fragmentations of the Whole cannot be identical with each other. For instance, when people are healthy, the 'healthy' attributes would be same with all individuals. But when people are 'sick', the attributes of 'sickness' would not be same. Anyway, the most of the symptoms of the 'sickness' would be same with the most of the sick people, to certain extent. 

It is here, the people who have fragmented minds, understand Krishnamurti. Being Fragmented in their 'thinking' they have developed, doubt, insecurity and fear, in their early life, when they try to interact and communicate their 'Thoughts' with others. So when Krishnamurti explains, even using neutral examples of a door, a tree, a flower, a bird, etc., and how doubt, insecurity, fear comes about, when one tries to 'Respond', When one tries to 'Think', about these, once one has become aware of the same. So when Krishnamurti explains that the solution to overcome these doubts, fears, and insecurity, is to stop thinking, these people would understand him perfectly, When K suggest that the solution as pathless, they have to accept him, unless, they themselves embark on a journey to find an alternative way to find a solution for themselves. So it seems that these people get so conditioned by Krishnamurti's Teaching, they would not ever embark on a such a journey. 

The other reason why these people who have fragmented minds like K, would not try to find a solution for their 'doubts, insecurity, fear, etc.', on their own is, since their minds are fragmented, any 'thoughts' or 'thinking' of a solution also would involve 'thinking', thus furthering or perpetuating the Division or the fragmentation, as clearly explained by Krishnamurti. So one who understand this situation, because of his mind is fragmented, how can he start 'thinking' of a solution, without perpetuating the fragmentation, thus increasing his doubt, insecurity and fears, causing more sufferings? 

So these people who have the same problems as that of Krishnamurti, cannot follow Krishnamurti, for a solution to free themselves from suffering, but only wait in expectation of the same Pathless solution of 'Thoughtless-ness' to come about. Hence, it is not Following Krishnamurti, either, as there is nothing to do, to get a solution.

Then there are a third type of followers of Krishnamurti, who follow his teaching as something deep, and as a philosophy of life. Since, Krishnamurti's Teaching is nether a philosophy of life, nor a spiritual path leading to overcome suffering caused by Desires, Angers, Lusts and Ignorance, as in Buddhism and other spiritual paths, these people who take K's teaching as such also don't follow Krishnamurti, by not understating him, where K Only speaks about his inner Division, inner Fragmentation, as the problem of the entire humanity. 

Therefore all these followers of Krishnamurti, were and are created by his Teaching of his inner fragmentation, which is not understood by people who don't having such a fragmented mind, or having a fragmented mind and understanding K, or trying to understand his Teaching intellectually as a philosophy, don't or can't follow him as there is nothing to follow . 

Hence, none of them are Followers of Krishnamurti, as K understood as it would be as such, and declared that 'none can follow me'.

<Previous Post            First Post              NEXT

Beginning Of 'I', Ego, For Krishnamurti Is Memory.

Quote Krishnamurti:
 
Now, each one tries to immortalize the product of environment; that thing which is the result of the environment we try to make eternal. That is, the various fears, hopes, longings, prejudices, likes, personal views which we glorify as our temperament - these are, after all, the result, the product of environment; and the bundle of these memories, which is the result of environment, the product of the reactions to environment, this bundle becomes that consciousness which we call the "I". 

Talks and Answers to Questions by Krishnamurti 

Ojai Camp, 1 1934
First Talk in The Oak Grove,
Ojai, California 

End Of The Quote.
 
What does Krishnamurti say here? He says, that 'this bundle becomes that consciousness which we call the "I".' 

What is this bundle he speaks of? It is the, 'bundle of these memories.' 

What are those memories? They are the, 'the various fears, hopes, longings, prejudices, likes, personal views which we glorify as our temperament.' 

How those things come into being as a memory? It is the 'result of the environment.' or 'the product of environment.'
 
Hence, environment causes bundle of memory related to oneself, and these memories in turn produces the consciousness of 'I'. Here one may feel that Krishnamurti was erroneous. It is not so, because in Krishnamurti, the mental process start with that of Memory. 

Krishnamurti says, that after being Aware of a Tree, if it ends there with the Awareness, then no thinking takes place. But if thinking takes places, then it is with the past memory of the tree, which is the 'Thought', which is 'Not Me', and the person who become Aware of this 'Not Me' or the 'Thought' or the 'Observed' is the 'Me' (or I in Response which K calls as for 'Me'. ), which that 'Me' is also is created by these past memory of oneself, that is the 'bundle of memories' of oneself. 

We perpetually have the consciousness of 'I' or Ego, whether we think or not, while we are awake, due to mind attributes, which functions always with us, and I don't want to discuss those attributes here, as it is not necessary, because of the fact that we continuously feel the 'I' is enough to prove that those attributes are functioning with us. 

Since, these mind attributes which creates continuous consciousness of 'I' in most of us, is missing from the mind of Krishnamurti, creating a Gap, a Division, the consciousness of 'I' starts with the First mind attribute which starts to function in the mind of K, that is memory. 

Hence, for Krishnamurti the consciousness of 'I' has to be continuously stimulated by the memory of the past of himself, by becoming aware of something in the environment. Otherwise K is not in a 'selfless' position, but he is in a 'Sleep' like state. When K becomes aware of the environment, it awakes K's memories of himself in relation to the past, and he become conscious of 'I'. But if thoughts arises of the things he becomes aware of, then this 'I' in response becomes Me, the Observer of the 'Thought' and the 'thought' being the 'observed', and not that outside thing being the 'observed'. And the 'observed' is the 'Not Me', which is the 'Thought'.

Therefore normal people have the consciousness of 'I', throughout the wakeful state. Krishnamurti is in an unconscious state of 'I', while awake, and only memory of the past of oneself creates the consciousness of 'I', in K, time and off.

So this unstable mind creates, doubt, insecurity, fear and sufferings in Krishnamurti. 

For a normal person, thinking is an activity he does, hence, he perceives this act of thinking as, 'I am thinking'. For Krishnamurti, thinking may take place as a Response from 'Me', which is unavoidable by 'Me' and therefore this thinking is 'Not Me', creating a division within, creating doubt, insecurity, fear and suffering. But a normal person may enjoy 'thinking' and indulge in 'day dreaming', where he would not feel doubt, insecurity, fear and suffering in thinking. 

Hence, normal people when seek to end their sufferings, do not seek solutions for doubt, insecurity, fear as the cause of their sufferings. They don't seek solutions to inner fragmentation or division in thinking. 

And the spiritual teachers never speak of inner division and doubt, insecurity, fear as the causes of sufferings. Lord Buddha has stated, that Anger, desire, lust and Ignorance (ideas and opinions) as the causes of suffering.

<Previous Post            First Post               NEXT ->